Python, C++, Java, Smalltalk, Eiffel,...

[Donn Cave]

Quoth jajvirta at cc.helsinki.fi (Jarno J Virtanen):
| 15 Jul 2001 10:20:38 -0400 kj0 wrote:
| > Where can I find a reasonably non-partisan but also reasonably
| > detailed comparison of the more popular OO languages (C++, Java,
| > Python, etc.).  
| [snip]
|
| Here's one: http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/keith/crisis/
|
| It's subjective, but he clearly states what he wants and then ranks
| programming languages according to the criterias.

Interesting reading.  He says "crisis", but it seems to be several
years since - hope it was resolved meanwhile, but maybe it's a good
thing to be always searching a little.

One thing about this and other comparisons to be seen on the web,
OCaml belongs on the list if only for its speed.  I have been trying
to learn a little of it lately.  He mentions that the syntax is full
of annoying warts, and my forehead is getting permanent wrinkles from
too much squinting.  But it's interesting that such an abstract model
(function programming) would run so close to the top of the charts
for speed.  (And too bad that doesn't work for Erlang or Haskell.)
And there are some good things - e.g., something as simple as a record
type (a.k.a. struct), for which I still hanker a bit with Python.

	Donn Cave, donn at u.washington.edu